• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

2016 Camaro pics

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
AMCRambler said:
New RS5 goes for $70,000 to start. You can get 2016 Camaro ZL1 for $56,000 with the LT1 tuned for 550bhp. Why doesn't Audi offer the same 4.2 on a higher trim car with 500+ hp? That's right, it's tapped out at 450. Gonna need some turbos to keep up I guess.

Troll does not understand the concept of motor being tuned for reliability. The closer to max power you run a smaller block engine the shorter the maintenance intervals and less life you get out of it.
Click to expand...

People don't drive Audi's to "keep up" or whatever childish form of self fulfillment the unwashed masses seek. Audi is a statement of technology and class.
 
I'll have to see it in person, but so far blah. I wasn't a fan of the 2014 refresh and this looks to be more blah.
 
996GT2 said:
Because it gets better mpg than your Volkswagen and won't catastrophically implode after the warranty runs out?

😉
Click to expand...

I can think of a potential DSG transmission failure, dirty air filter, or catalytic converter if used with low octane gas, or maybe problems with the gauges if they're built like the old VWs.

The Camaro is likely a more reliable car, but to be fair the RS5 won't explode to crap pieces either.
 
JMapleton said:
People don't drive Audi's to "keep up" or whatever childish form of self fulfillment the unwashed masses seek. Audi is a statement of technology and class.
Click to expand...

Aren't you the $300 jeans guy?

Anyway....

Looks good in blue:


lxEZvdU.jpg


Much improved interior:

nLhzqAU.jpg


Overall not bad.
 
Last edited:
railer said:
Looks good in blue:


lxEZvdU.jpg


Much improved interior:

nLhzqAU.jpg


Overall not bad.
Click to expand...

I once took a Camaro for a test drive. Almost. I was so disappointed that I didn't even start it up after I sat it in at the dealership because the interior was so terrible (at 6' tall, I felt small inside it...the armrests & shifter were a mile away) & because it was so wide (felt like it was parking line to parking line). Although the 200-pound weightloss & new interior are pretty compelling...

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2016-chevy-camaro/
 
Not liking the back end much at all, it looks like an RSX and not really fitting for a muscle car. There was some sporty kinda economy car concept Chevy did in the past 5 years that it also reminds me of.

I really like the SS front end but the normal one not so much, namely the lower LED lighting and then big gaping plastic grille (where you can easily tell that the actual opening is much smaller).

Something about this just looks really off. The proportions seem worse than the current Camaro. I'm kinda getting a Mustang II vs Mustang vibe.

Interior looks better but still not all that good to me. I prefer a lot more understated minimalist look.

Should be a good car, and it's not really ugly, but doesn't really appeal to me.
 
Gillbot said:
I'll have to see it in person, but so far blah. I wasn't a fan of the 2014 refresh and this looks to be more blah.
Click to expand...

just another version of the 1970 challcamstang.

the 21st century is all about retro styling because neither manufacturers nor customers have any confidence in new designs. if anyone strays from the expected homogeny, the result is usually a remote control from hell or a pontiac aztek.
 
Interior looks to be a big improvement. For the exterior, the SS looks good, but something about the base model looks off. Also not a huge fan of the front bumper to fender seam.
 
From what I can see, it does look very similar to the previous gen so not sure why the big mystery. It does look a bit tighter, smaller and more athletic. The Blue seems to show off the lines pretty well.

Sorry but I had to laugh at the Turbo 4 option. I get the Stang getting one due to its heritage. But I don't get the Camaro getting one except to copy Ford and boost their CAFE ratings. Guessing the 6 option is toast if the Turbo 4 sells well.

Will reserve final judgement when they street. Looking forward to it.
 
Oh look. Another person that doesn't understand that displacement doesn't give you any true indication of engine size. The LT1 is a smaller engine package than your engine.
 
The Boston Dangler said:
just another version of the 1970 challcamstang.

the 21st century is all about retro styling because neither manufacturers nor customers have any confidence in new designs. if anyone strays from the expected homogeny, the result is usually a remote control from hell or a pontiac aztek.
Click to expand...

I agree. Same with movies. People are out of ideas anymore so we just keep getting sequels.
 
HitAnyKey said:
Sorry but I had to laugh at the Turbo 4 option. I get the Stang getting one due to its heritage. But I don't get the Camaro getting one except to copy Ford and boost their CAFE ratings. Guessing the 6 option is toast if the Turbo 4 sells well.
Click to expand...

Not the first I4 in a Camaro and this particular I4 Turbo is shared across many vehicles so it makes sense.
 
It looks to me like a lot of the changes in the rear were motivated by CAFE standards, to clean up the aerodynamics. Aside from a distinctive front and rear bumper, the new version looks a lot more like every other 2016 sedan.

Of course, aerodynamics will ultimately cause design convergence.
 
ElFenix said:
Where does the weight loss put it n comparison to the mustang?
Click to expand...

Close if it's truly 200lbs less across the board.

Current SS is listed at 3975 and V6 is 3719.

Project SS 3775 and V6 3519.

Mustang GT 3705 and V6 is 3526.

I don't remember the SS weighing in at that much when first launched so that's a little shocking.
 
This new Camaro and the new Mustang look so uninspiring. Just horrible misses from Chevy and Ford. Best to just go with the base C7 Vette.
 
eng2d2 said:
Do others feel this way?
Click to expand...

Not at all, I think the current gen camaro is the closest in design to 1967 than any other gen. it has the shark fin brake ducts in the Rear. same side window shape. The ass bump is almost exactly the same line. Narrow tail lights. It borrows the curved front from 1969.

I was a fan of them when they first came out because they were different and break from the cookie cutter car designs from the mid 2000s.

These new changes, while subtle, do even more to modernize it.

The old 1967 design is just difficult to modernize as compared to other vehicles. Not really sure what you could do to make it more like that era without people going WTF? Smaller maybe?

The 2015 mustang on the other hand... Wow, saw one up close the other day. They are beautiful. They did a good job there. I still wouldn't buy one though.
 
Kaido said:
Wow nice! How'd you score such a great deal?
Click to expand...

Do a search of dealership inventory within a 200 mile Radius. Find the dealership with the largest inventory of the vehicle that you want on hand. Then narrow the search to the vehicles that has been sitting on the lot the longest, it is usually the most expensive one they have on hand. Be prepared to spend the whole day (I was there for 9 hours), negotiations on car prices isn't fun and is completely exhausting. With all of this, plus letting the dealership know that you know the 2016 Camaro is about to be announced, making the Camaro you are looking at as being already obsolete, then you start working on price. DO NOT at any point mention that you have a trade-in, even if you do, I'm sorry to say, lie. Once you get to your negotiated price, then mention your trade-in.

So, the sticker price of my Camaro was $43,480 and I bought it for 33,166. I misstated and said I got 22% off. I redid the math and it was a little over 23%. I traded in my 2003 Trailblazer and got $4,200 for it plus I got window tint, stripes, and wheel locks for the Camaro. So $28,966 plus TT&L after trade in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top